Peckris

Me too.

I don't think you bought much in Saxon times, not on a village level anyway. Houses (huts) were built specifically for the incoming population, and boats would have been a shared resource, particularly longboats which your average villager inland wouldn't have seen anyway. Military service to the ruling earl was required, and in return you got citizenship which gave you a voice in the councils. For your daily requirements you farmed your own little patch and also farmed for the whole village; you'd have kept a pig and maybe a few chickens if you were lucky. You made your own furniture, and maybe traded your surplus for the occasional piece of jewellery, which would have been VERY rare! I imagine that silver coins were mostly used by higher level Saxons & Vikings in return for large transactions, such as building longboats and equipping an army, or building large communal structures like bridges and churches.

I'd put that down to the strike or the die Dave, not circulation wear.

Here's the kind of thing you might aim for, if you're wondering what to look for : (Any apparent roughness of the edge is simply due to poor cropping in Photoshop.)

Can't say. Haven't seen a link to the coins in question. Here they are: Link 1 Link 2 I can recommend the seller Thanks Paulus. In reply to Stuart's original question, I'd say I can't see any obvious signs of dipping. The absence of tone is not a de facto indication that a coin's been dipped, and anyway those don't display the usual character of dipping, especially the first one.

If it was just a case of wear, I'd say you got more than a decent deal - it's certainly better than VF. Unfortunately I have to agree with the others about the possible cleaning and chamfering, which would make it a coin to avoid.

Can't say. Haven't seen a link to the coins in question.

That would be like trying to grind LCW off a bun penny!

Not done that before, posted within a post! my post is:"Stranger still, the 2008 and 2011 are £3.00 too, so maybe not a typo...what's that all about?" I suspect they didn't amend the proof values? Mind you, they say in the description "...a section of Our Royal Arms..." - if Spink think they have their own Royal Arms then they are capable of just about anything

When would you need them by? And what size do you prefer (x-life, I mean, rather than ppi)?

Ah, but mine is the signed with ISBN type. I could get mine signed - after all, it's a post-production feature

Hammered / milled makes more sense to me, especially if the decimals were hived off into a softback produced every two or three years (after all, the values of decimals change even less than Roman and Ancients). Hammered / milled would give approximately half a book each, where pre-decimal / decimal would be about 7:1. But perhaps they've already identified that's where the biggest market split is?

Yes - it can't be a brockage, not with an obverse and reverse, so your shed theory is the most likely I reckon.

I have a few items I could scan for you Chris : two halfpennies that are better than VF (1771 and 1774 which covers both obverses) and a farthing 1773 EF. Let me know if they are any use (I would scan at 1200 dpi for size then reduce to 300 for you in Photoshop).

I'm keeping firm hold of my printed copy! It's a first edition, AUNC, and is the 'no ISBN' variety.

It's the same with Facebook, Twitter, etc - if I want to login to two separate accounts I have to have two browsers open, as otherwise any new tab or window will be for the account I already have open.

Excellent! I thought I had a multi-page email telling the story of "What do you say when your wife says, one Saturday afternoon..." - unfortunately despite it being hilarious, I don't have it; it must have been a paper print out from the late 90s before I got connected to email and the internet. (Was there ever such a time? Seems hard to imagine now).

Oh, believe me - it is! There are a massive number of fake £1 coins in circulation, and a gang producing them was busted only last year. They are fairly easy to spot when new though, and some are when worn too as they have the wrong reverse for the year on the other side.

All very good

And too, in the lettering style of the day, a punch with a very small 5 and one with a very small 3 would have looked rather similar.

Indeed - eat drink and be merry, for spring is a way off and there will be poor hunting until the next bison can be painted on the cave wall.

Depends on what you class as a 'date variety' and 'intentional'. As Derek points out, the narrow/wide dates that occur in the 1870s are simply the easiest method to identify what is actually a different reverse design (see Freeman for all the other changes and identifiers). Yes, it's micro-design in that the main Britannia reverse is essentially the same from 1860 to 1894, but it was slightly changed intentionally many times. On the other hand, the spacing of the final digit in OH 1890s pennies are the result of human agency in punching the final digit; you might view that as a kosher variety - some do, like some people collect Vicky silver die numbers - but it isn't even a micro design change and is certainly not intentional.

Off to relatives for Xmas dinner and festivities in about an hour Season's best, you lot!

In that case, I'm NOT clicking your link Dave

I just looked thru 10 1904 Pennies, and didn't find any with the 4 over the tooth! I would assume it is the most difficult to find. Yes Bob, they're unbelievably difficult to find and worth $15,995! Or the narrow date 1877 on your website, of course WOW!!!!!!! I have got to start paying more attention. It looks like David is going to have a additional 1904 for his book's next printing! Does anyone you know actually have one of these? I thought the $15,995 remark was simply jocularity ... it's serious?? Or perhaps you missed some British-type irony ..